Next Article in Journal
Mineral Requirements for China’s Energy Transition to 2060—Focus on Electricity and Transportation
Previous Article in Journal
Generations and Branded Content from and through the Internet and Social Media: Modern Communication Strategic Techniques and Practices for Brand Sustainability—The Greek Case Study of LACTA Chocolate
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Study of Educational Service Quality in Mongolian Universities

Sustainability 2023, 15(1), 580; https://doi.org/10.3390/su15010580
by Bilegjargal Ganbold 1, Kyungbo Park 2 and Jongyi Hong 3,*
Reviewer 1:
Reviewer 2:
Reviewer 3: Anonymous
Sustainability 2023, 15(1), 580; https://doi.org/10.3390/su15010580
Submission received: 14 November 2022 / Revised: 6 December 2022 / Accepted: 23 December 2022 / Published: 29 December 2022
(This article belongs to the Section Sustainable Education and Approaches)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This paper focuses on a topic of major importance generated by the labour market, - the quality of university education. The relevance of this paper is proved by the fact that Mongolia is making gradual progress in ensuring and strengthening the reputation and the position of Mongolian higher education at a domestic and international level. This article is  relevant for the journal scope.  The methodology is clear explained through SERVQUAL approach, analytical Keno Model.The primarily aim of this paper is reflected in the need to improve customer satisfaction of Monglian higher educatinal service.  The major significant research results are revieled in the efficient qualitative evaluation of educational service from multidimentional factors; identification of the degree of customer satisfaction amoung Mongolian higher educational service students and determination of quality characteristics for improving customer satisfaction, students' needs evaluation in the university structure and deduction of theoretical and empirical implications for improving university competitiveness. It is clearly presented the most efficient potential quality characteristic for improving the level of satisfaction and  quality factors to increase development sustainability of universities. All these can contribute to the primary basis creation for objective evaluation. We can admit that the article contains all of the necessary components. All conclusions are supported by the results. The tables and shemes are appropriate and properly show the data. They are easy to interprete and understand. The conclusions are consistent with the aruments presented.

As recomendation for the authors  to improve the content of the article it is necessary to deepen the scope of the survey to demonstrate the validity of the research results and increase the number of participants in this study. To speak on the behalf of all the Mongolian Universities ((as the authors state in line 47  their number is 88 by 2021-2022 academic year) you should conduct a survey amoung a greater number of students and take into account the degree of satisfaction of all the stakeholders of the educational process (not only undergraduates, but graduates, employers and the teaching staff). As the research based on 50 graduates is not as developed as I would expect to see. To define the degree of custormer satisfaction of Mongolian Universities one should pay more attantion to a more valid basis for objective conclusion.

The cited references mostly the publications from 1994 up to 2013. Only 2 publications can be referred to recent publications within the last 10 years ( see line 638-642). The paper would be greatly improved if the authors used more modern sources within the last five years.

Despite these facts, I'm sure that the paper will attract a wide readership as Quality Education is the UN’s fourth Sustainable Development Goal and it is necessary to have a clear understanding of students' requirements and a strategic plan to improve efficiency.  

 

Author Response

Answer to Reviewer #1

 

Dear Respected Reviewer #1:

We appreciate the reviewer #1 comments, which surely improve our manuscript.

According to reviewer’s comments, we revised this manuscript carefully. All responses and answers are listed below. All revisions were marked as the highlighted text in the manuscript.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Identifies a research topic but may be too broad in scope and/or the thesis is somewhat unclear and needs to be developed further. The focal point is not consistently maintained throughout the paper.

Author Response

Answer to Reviewer #1

 

Dear Respected Reviewer #2:

We appreciate the reviewer #2 comments, which surely improve our manuscript.

According to reviewer’s comments, we revised this manuscript carefully. All responses and answers are listed below. All revisions were marked as the highlighted text in the manuscript.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

The authors are congratulated for the relevance of the subject matter of the study and their concern for the quality of the educational services provided by university institutions and the improvement of customer-student satisfaction as a recipient of these services.

 

The theoretical development and, in general, the methodological decisions are considered adequate for the research objective. This is not so in the case of the sample, which, in addition to involving few participants in the study, focuses on a specific area of the university under investigation ("department of four-year universities"). This limits the possibility of statistical generalization of the results and the scope of the conclusions not only to other universities in the country (as intended), but also to other faculties or Centers of the university under investigation. Therefore, the study could be published if a larger sample including participants from various faculties or Centers of the Mongolian National University or other universities in the country is used.

Author Response

Answer to Reviewer #1

 

Dear Respected Reviewer #3:

We appreciate the reviewer #3 comments, which surely improve our manuscript.

According to reviewer’s comments, we revised this manuscript carefully. All responses and answers are listed below. All revisions were marked as the highlighted text in the manuscript.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 4 Report

A comprehensive study of the quality of educational service in Mongolian universities is presented. Both the literature review and the introduction of the manuscript include a significant number of bibliographic citations that support the words of the authors. In this sense, and once the bibliographical references have been reviewed, a certain relevance of them has been missed, since practically all of them are publications from more than 10 years ago, only 2 citations are from 2015 or later. This should be reviewed and justify the heavy use of pre 2012 references, especially some of them, which are more than 20 years old.

In the case study, where the phases of the model are collected, what could be the results of this manuscript are presented to a large extent through quantitative, statistical data. Sometimes reading and understanding them becomes difficult. Therefore, it is recommended that authors include brief explanations that help to understand the data collected in the tables.

Finally, the conclusions are timely but especially brief, they should be reviewed by the authors. On the other hand, regarding the limitations of the study, it is important to emphasize that these must refer only to the research itself.

Author Response

Answer to Reviewer #1

 

Dear Respected Reviewer #4:

We appreciate the reviewer #4 comments, which surely improve our manuscript.

According to reviewer’s comments, we revised this manuscript carefully. All responses and answers are listed below. All revisions were marked as the highlighted text in the manuscript.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Back to TopTop